Pages

Friday, 26 November 2010

In an attempt to provide Fascism with some Green credentials and a gloss of anti-authoritarianism and even Socialism, 'National Anarchist' Troy Southgate (who also runs the neo-Classical / post-Industrial group H.E.R.R, and is a member of the groups Seelenlicht and Horologium*) has created some of the most bizarre ideological hybrids conceivable, grafting bits of Anarchist and Socialist phraseology onto his hard core Racist and ultra-reactionary politics to try to recruit from the Anarchist and Green milieus. He has denied ever being a Fascist ("I am not and have never been a Fascist of any description" - WMTN? Comment), and in an essay, 'Revolution vs. Reaction', he says that "it is quite certain that we have nothing in common with the intellectually bankrupt legions of the modern Left, but then neither do we owe any allegiance to those on the Right. Many so-called Nationalists are content to describe themselves as being 'right of centre', or even on the 'Far Right', but it must be stated quite categorically that true Nationalism has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Right-wing politics." [Southgate, Tradition and Revolution, p68].

If you took Southgate seriously as an ideologist you might therefore be a little surprised to learn that - as someone who "has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Right Wing politics" - he is somehow also a founder and the Chairman of the 'New Right' (NR) group, the aim of which is to "unite the disparate strands of the British Right and get everybody pulling in the same direction" [Dan Ghetu, 'Interview', Synthesis], and which, in a clod-hopping, British Empricist manner, is trying to imitate the continental Nouvelle Droite and become a focus of far-Right ideological innovation. You might be even more surprised to hear that, despite his claims to be against Fascism (which is 'reactionary'), this group collects together not only extreme anti-Semites and other racists, but also, er, Fascists in a discussion group aimed at forging a new image for the, er, Right. The following is an extract from an article about the NR taken from the latest edition of the UK anti-Fascist magazine Searchlight ('New Right, Old Nazis'). The article begins by discussing last month's NR meeting at which Martin Webster - the Chairman of the National Front (NF) during its 70's heyday, who boasted that his party were "forming a well-oiled Nazi machine in Britain" - gave a speech full of traditional Nazi anti-Semitic rhetoric.

"The New Right group was formed by Troy Southgate, a man whose life has been an odyssey across the far right scene since his imprisonment as an NF street thug in the 1970s. He has dabbled in far-right music, National Bolshevism and similar movements that emerged in the former communist states during the 1990s, various Green Anarchist outfits and a blend of far-right paganism and satanism.

He was a founder member of the International Third Position (ITP) together with Nick Griffin, now leader of the BNP, and other NF 'Political Soldiers' in 1989. Like Southgate and his followers today, it was heavily influenced by the Italian mystic and National Socialist Julius Evola, a man so extreme that the Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini had him locked up twice. Evola's wartime exile was lived out in the company of senior SS men and after the war he mentored Roberto Fiore, who in turn acted as political mentor to Nick Griffin while on the run in the UK from a terrorist conviction in Italy. Griffin still works closely with him in Europe.

Southgate left the ITP in September 1992 and from then on changed political affiliation as often as his underwear. In the middle of this decade he and a small group of others, including the quasi-intellectual Jonathan Bowden, created the New Right group with the aim of inspiring old thinking in a refreshed way. Its meetings... gave London's far right the chance to hear pagans, Muslim converts and leading figures in Europe's far right and beyond.

Despite being a BNP officer until the end of last year, Bowden has regularly chaired and addressed New Right meetings without any objection from Griffin. Audiences... comprise a mixture of boot boys, pagans, well-to-do Jew baiters and several BNP councillors.

The long list of speakers reads like a who's who of far-right extremists. They have included Alexander Dugin... Dr Tomislav Sunić... the Holocaust denier 'Lady' Michèle Renouf... Michael Woodbridge... and... Norman Lowell....It is not only old nazis who attend new Right meetings. Matt Tait, the BNP's Bletchley organiser, acts as the New Right student organiser... ...While Southgate remains on the fringe of the far-right music scene in Britain, he has a big fan club among nazis, pagans and other oddballs in eastern Europe" [Searchlight, December 2010, pp14-15]

So there you have it, Southgate - who has "never been a Fascist of any description", for whom "Fascism itself was and remains a bastardised form of Capitalism" [Southgate, Tradition and Revolution, p103], and whose beliefs have "absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Right-wing politics" - is a founder of the 'New Right' and organises meetings at which the speakers are almost exclusively Fascists, old and new, like Webster, Bowden, et al. Frankly, when he says that he's not of the Right and not a Fascist Southgate is either the most confused political ideologue in recorded history... or a liar trying desperately to infiltrate the Anarchist and Green movements to turn them toward Fascism. What do you reckon?

* According to Wikipedia,"He has also worked with Sweden's Survival Unit, Holland's Erich Zahn, the Canadian project, Funerary Call, the Italian projects Ouroboros, Bonebound, Silent Cathedral and Sala Della Colonne, the Polish projects Elvatorium, Ollin and Desert Divinity, and the German bands, Sagittarius, Von Thronstahl & The Days of the Trumpet Call.

Well he's damn well not getting me, I'm an Anarchist interested in Paganism and a fan of Metal and goth Music. I'm also fundamentally anti-racism, I don't just believe that human beings are all just one species, I know we are. I hate racism.

Oh please, treating these men as a serious threat to modern society is risible. Yes, we all know there was a brief blip in the far right scene that based its identity on Catholic traditionalism/mysticism, avant garde 'intellectuals', Hilaire Beloc etc -- but even those groups ditched that 'progression' quickly enough as anachronistic, and errr....because most saw it was urrrmmm....plain silly...

I mean, it isn't going to catch on with the real foot soldiers of fascism is it, really?

"C'mon lads, would you like to join us for a debate on the Knights of Malta's medieval Syriac mystical ritual, and Hilaire Beloc's definition of the changing seasons, and their meaning within the folk consciousness of the English mind; oh, and while we are at it, let's sit around and discuss Ezra Pound's "Cantos" and Jacob Epstein's Vorticcist sculptures depicting the heroic warrior gesture in WW1."

Errr, sorry mate,all due respect and all, but you lost me there -- my mate rang me cuz I thought we wuz up for a ruck...don't ya know there's a new Paki take away round the corner? Wot's Ezra Pound got to do with them new darkies off the boat from Dover? Errr, who is Hilaire Beloc ? Oh, is he the bloke that beat up one of 'em Kurdish lads after the pubs closed last night?

I get the impression from what I have read of Troy Southgate, that he wants to be a 'ethno-cultural separatist' -- he and others in his group seem to respect Malcolm X and Loius Farrakhan, as well as Neturei Karta Orthodox Jews, for similar reasons.

On the point of these 'intellectual' ideas and artists being a danger again, it is pretty difficult to see them as a real danger -- because, fascinating as these ideas may be to *some* people, once anyone actually reads these books, it is plain that most of the texts are esoteric to the point of cosmic weirdness, and others of the ideas in the books are, more often than not, well, plain silly or very dull.

I mean, who is really going to wade their way through a Guenon, Spengler, or Junger book, and then go and beat up a foreigner? It is more likely they'd fall asleep with boredom before they got to the end of the book, or get mired in some absurdly anachronistic medieval notions.

Junger, to his credit, was a very good war writer ( see his first book ) but his 'fascist warrior/man as glorified machine' stuff is just silly, and very very difficult to take seriously. His later Stoic / Max Stirner-ite "Anarch" stuff, whilst not offensive in any way, or hardly right wing, is also very derivative.

Also, your blog pages constant fear that these men are going to 'mislead the youth' seriously under estimates people's intelligence -- I mean, the kinds of people who buy these absurd records, with all their cabaret army gear and circus-ham imagery, would have to be interested in that kind of thing to a degree anyway to even bother in the first place -- I just don't see it as a simple case of 'corrupting poor and innocent youth.' ( 'Oh man, he made me believe he wasn't a fascist -- but he was ! I have been mislead, and cheated! I weren't to know guv !' )

I mean, the German army helmets and SS regalia is, c'mon, let's be honest, a bit of a give away isn't it....

"I mean, who is really going to wade their way through a Guenon, Spengler, or Junger book, and then go and beat up a foreigner?"

Plenty of people, actually, including several of those named in the article. To take one at random, according to the Wikipedia article I linked to Webster "spent time in prison for knocking Jomo Kenyatta to the ground outside the London Hilton hotel, for helping to organise the paramilitary organisation Spearhead, and was convicted under the 1936 Public Order Act". Southgate himself manages to combine an interest in these thinkers, and Paganism and Esoterica too, with a conviction for actual bodily harm and affray which saw him receive an 18 month prison sentence. Why do you find it so hard to believe that people who read Fascist & Traditionalist literature might engage in violence? All the evidence points to the opposite conclusion.

Your other argument seems to be that Fascist ideologues cannot influence anyone because you would have to be a Fascist to listen to them in the first place - which is also clearly untrue.

The kernel of truth in what you are saying is that Fascism doesn't ultimately recruit people by providing them with an understanding of society, but by spinning myths that might appeal to their prejudices,which in turn are created by media and political scapegoating. The New Right is one of a number of attempts on the Right to articulate new myths and fantasies that they hope might prove persuasive to those affected by the economic crisis, globalisation and environmental degradation. The appeal of these myths is not rational or intellectual, but aesthetic.

Yes, but Webster is a forgotten pariah isn't he, and whilst knocking Kenyatta to the ground was obviously an unpleasant, racist act of violence, it wasn't actually at all a threat in any way in a wider sense : Mandelson had green sludge thrown at him, Berlusconi had his teeth knocked in, Prescott had rotten food thrown at him. These gestures are negligible in the wider scheme of things.

And if the 'appeal of these myths is not rational or intellectual, but aesthetic' then we are all safe, because their music, dress sense, and their half baked toying with more potentially lethal themes ( ref Walter Benjamin's critique of same in Junger's work ) is all so shallowly done,it's hard to see it proving to be some fulfilment of a Sorelian 'prole catalyst-myth'.

There's far bigger threats out there than Southgate, Bowden and Tibet.

The literature, too, from Junger to Guenon to Spengler, to Beloc, really is not going to cause any trouble. Most of it -- with the certain exception of Junger's excellent war diaries -- is just insufferably dull,derivative ( such as the horrible corruptions of otherwise beautiful Vedantic souces) obscure, or just so esoteric , resigned, Stoic and other wordly as to be no threat at all.

"The New Right is one of a number of attempts on the Right to articulate new myths and fantasies that they hope might prove persuasive to those affected by the economic crisis, globalisation and environmental degradation. The appeal of these myths is not rational or intellectual, but aesthetic."

The appeal of these ideas is more then aesthetic but rather atavistic. They evoke a sense of primordial resonance, as sense that these ideas are articulating a knowledge, understanding or point of reference that is eternal and absolute. That is why they are appealing in light of "economic crisis, globalisation and environmental degradation".

A sense of the primordial is highly appealing as a critique of a world falling into a downward spiral of dissolution. It's not surprising that these ideas have taken more root in America, where these problems are far more acute.

When one walks through the endless, soulless, banality of the American corporate consumer landscape of endless malls and wal-marts, its not very hard to see the appeal of a "revolt against the modern world".

I'd rather live in a Volkish village then the MCglobal spectacle any day.

"The appeal of these ideas is more then aesthetic but rather atavistic"

The ideas attempt a kind of atavism but are ultimately kitsch; a sort of nostalgia for an invented past (the Volkish Village, for example). These ideologies don't provide a way to get beyond the modern world. They respond to specifically modern anxieties (fear of dislocation, alienation, break up of communities) with a racial and sexual 'utopia' that is presented as more 'real' that the chaos of Capitalism despite being based on nothing more than esoteric fantasy. The modern world may well often look like a "consumer landscape of endless malls and Wal-Marts", but it also creates a working class capable of doing something about that, but which, at times of economic crisis, Fascism aims to keep divided on racial and sexual lines.

"The ideas attempt a kind of atavism.... a sort of nostalgia for an invented past (the Volkish Village, for example). These ideologies don't provide a way to get beyond the modern world."

Perhaps partly true -- but first, how many people follow these BANA type 'anarcho nationalist' ideas? Very very few. And, if they are non violent ( and even resigned in attitude) , then why do you care about them? You have no evidence whatsoever that Southgate's "Group" ( whoever they are ) are violent, or even plans violence. The book many of them like , Evola's "Ride the Tiger" teaches a kind of stoic resignation and detachment from the modern world, certainly not violent engagement. It teaches a kind of Advaitist-Vedantic attitude to the world of coolly 'bearing with' the world, rather than attacking it. Junger suggests the same attitude in "Euemuswill." Secondly, who are you to say that their past is entirely invented? That is a sweeping statement -- maybe they are looking back to values that have disappeared, but, once were real. You and I might not like those ideas, but they do. Equally so, you and I might not like long gone Islamic values in Spain -- but they did exist , and some people did, and do value them.( more on that later)

" They respond to specifically modern anxieties (fear of dislocation, alienation, break up of communities) with a racial and sexual 'utopia' that is presented as more 'real' that the chaos of Capitalism despite being based on nothing more than esoteric fantasy."

Again, perhaps true -- but they are not the only ones to do it are they? Wahhabi and Salafi Muslims do exactly the same, no different, as do The Nation of Islam; and, so does nearly every strict Haredim Orthodox Jewish sect. All of these groups have many many more members than Southgate, BANA et al -- why aren't you looking into their beliefs too?

"The modern world may well often look like a "consumer landscape of endless malls and Wal-Marts", but it also creates a working class capable of doing something about that, but which, at times of economic crisis, Fascism aims to keep divided on racial and sexual lines."

It seems here that you favour a Vanguard approach -- if so what is it? Are you going to galvanise and lead the working classes? Tell us how.

Ultimately, I have no problem at all with you tackling these BANA and Wakeford types -- but you are shooting very little fish in a very little barrel.

Why do you seem afraid to look at bigger culprits, in UK and outside UK, and I mean groups of all 'ideologies', colours and creeds and religious belief, or no belief at all.

And here are some very very frightening people, with very frightening ideas ( see youtube added ) -- these ideas and the money and power these people have, really make Southgate's small rural cells of volkish/Beloc inspired dreamers in Suffolk, and Tibet's indie records in Hackney seem very very insignificant --

How can you infer that I 'favour a Vanguard approach' based simply on my mentioning the working class? I don't. I am simply pointing out that those who are affected hardest by economic crisis have everything to lose if they are divided by race.

"Why do you seem afraid to look at bigger culprits, in UK and outside UK, and I mean groups of all 'ideologies', colours and creeds and religious belief"

Because this is a blog about (broadly) the overlap between post-Industrial Culture and neo-Fascism, and the theoretical issues that gives rise to. It is not a blog about 'the history of bad things' or 'ideas I disapprove of' or 'things you may have read on the Internet: a correction'. The people blowing smoke are those suggest that I change the subject.

Anonymous said: "You have no evidence whatsoever that Southgate's "Group" ( whoever they are ) are violent, or even plans violence."

Aside from his conviction for violence, Southgate is known (as far as he is known at all, given that he's an obscure figure) for organising a para-military would-be terrorist group called the NRF; and as an advocate of violent terrorist-style actions.

After describing Southgate splitting from the National Front into the International Third Position, and then breaking away from the ITP to form his own English Nationalist Movement, & drawing on Southgate's own writing Wikipedia currently says this about him:

"In 1998 he and other ENM members founded the National Revolutionary Faction, which he describes as "a hardline revolutionary organisation based on an underground cell-structure similar to that used by both the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) and the IRA", operating on the principle of leaderless resistance. The NRF also had a camping/hiking fraternity known as the Greenshirts, based on Corneliu Zelea Codreanu's Romanian Iron Guard. Members performed torchlight ceremonies and distributed small bags of earth."

Southgate may be a pathetic fantasist but anonymous claiming this fascist imbecile isn't violent and doesn't plan violence is utterly ridiculous.

which is precisely what the Corneliu Codreanu did in ceremonies with his core cadres - the people who led the Iron Guard ('Legion of the Archangel Michael') in its bloody, indiscriminate massacres of Romanian Jews during WW2. Wikipedia says of the Iron Guard: "The mysticism of the Legion led to a cult of death, martyrdom, violence, and self-sacrifice. Its action squads were called echipa morţii, or "death squads". A chapter of the Legion was called a... nest... These groups observed rituals that included writing oaths in blood and drinking blood."

... how very Death Metal

The Iron Guard excelled themselves in the savagery of their anti-Semitism. They are infamous, among other things, for their pogrom of Jews in Bucharest, where they took their victims to the slaughterhouse and butchered them in a mockery of kosher practices (as detailed by Raul Hilberg in 'The Destruction of the European Jews')

Southgate, like Evola, admires the Iron Guard for their 'Spritual Values'... by which is meant the religious mania that drove them to such levels of ferocity that even the SS were sickened; Mircea Eliade reports that Evola was 'dazzled' by Codreanu.

You sound like The Daily Mail, reporting Muslims for 'suspicious behaviour',you really do -- what you are saying is so Daily Mail.

'Mohamed Taher was found in his house in Burnley with radical literature glorifying Muslim parites from the 1920's, now banned in Egypt, and he refused to denounce Hezbollah'.....

which is basically what you are saying about Southgate, a man who had a conviction for violence about 25 years ago, and whose only 'crime' seems to be liking weird, esoteric , long dead groups from 60 or so years ago.

If you have evidence the man is a threat, why are you hiding behind pseudonyms and playing around with these ideas? Not even Daily Mail journos do that. Why don't you just report the man to the police if you seem to believe he poses such a threat to people?

Personally, I have no time for any of these bands,whose music I find horrible, and, having read some of the early 20th C literature they seem to enjoy, I have no time for that either, and I find the imagery they go in for to be pretty nauseating, but the witch hunt tone of your blog is sensationalism and gutter journalism. Plus you don't have the balls to go after the REAL fascists.

@Anon: you said there was no evidence that the ideas of Gueron, Spengler or Junger actually led to violence. A commenter simply observed that Troy Southgate - the subject of the post, who is clearly a follower of all three authors - has a conviction for violence. You then accuse that person of dragging up the past. But how can one respond to your arguments without appealing to evidence?

And why the talk of 'crimes' anyway? The point here is to criticise (the contradictions of) Southgate's political philosophy. It is you who says that that is invalid unless it can first be proved that the philosophy leads to violence. You aren't happy to discuss political philosophies, you first want proof 'crimes' before you will talk about ideas. There's a kind of logic to that, but you undermine it when you then criticise others for wanting to talk about specific acts of violence: it's you who demanded such evidence.

Which way do you want to have it? We critique ideologies? Or we have to provide some sort of prosecution case against individual ideologues first? I find the former the more useful and interesting.

What I find odd is that, while the Anons keep pointing out that the people featured are 'irrelevant', 'harmless', totally obscure and a distraction compared to 'the real nazis', they go to great lengths to produce paragraphs of comments in their defence. If these people really are so 'irrelevant' that they're not worth blogging about, why even bother wading in to offer an opinion?

"The ideas attempt a kind of atavism but are ultimately kitsch; a sort of nostalgia for an invented past (the Volkish Village, for example). These ideologies don't provide a way to get beyond the modern world. They respond to specifically modern anxieties (fear of dislocation, alienation, break up of communities) with a racial and sexual 'utopia' that is presented as more 'real' that the chaos of Capitalism despite being based on nothing more than esoteric fantasy. The modern world may well often look like a "consumer landscape of endless malls and Wal-Marts", but it also creates a working class capable of doing something about that, but which, at times of economic crisis, Fascism aims to keep divided on racial and sexual lines."

The notion of volkish village is more in keeping, or at the very least, closer to the true nature of the working class then any Marxist romanticized notions of the working class. What group of average working people seeks diversity over what they the drawn to on a instinctual level? Aren't family, culture, history and community classically working class values? Hasn't cultural marxism sought to destroy all that?

Speaking from hands on person experience, the majority of people I know who find an appeal in national anarchism and related concepts aren't former Nazis seeking a new image for old ideals, but rather former punks and squatters who were like the core concepts of anarchism, but do not like the cultural marxist influencedculture that surrounds anarchism because it excludes any sense of whiteness. Also these people are seeing "whiteness" as defined by an inherent organic pagan quality, by what they are drawn to on a instinctual, and atavistic level, rather then any x-tian history or history of exploitation of non-whites.

I for one don't condone the history of exploitation of non-europeans by european derived people, but that history is a history of classist exploitation more then a racial one in that it was done in the name profit not for any inherently white quality.

Who's been exploited in the name of Odin? Which may seem like a silly or moot point to hard line leftists, but not to us. Whiteness is an inherently pagan quality. The post-pagan history of european derived people stopped being inherently white and became a history of economic exploitation caused by the corruption of foreign ideals (X-tianity, etc.).

I see more of a potential for better race relations in the reestablishment of a pagan understanding of whiteness and white identity rather then through the dissolution of race, gender, and culture that the left seeks.

By the standards that pagans like to apply to Christians, quite a few people have been raped, plundered, killed and enslaved ”in the name of Odin”. Even if modern historians tend to have a much brighter view of pagan Scandinavians, stressing their roles as traders and builders of communities etc., the Viking raids weren't picnics.

@Oneiric: "I see more of a potential for better race relations in the re-establishment of a pagan understanding of whiteness and white identity rather then through the dissolution of race, gender, and culture that the left seeks. "

But that's the problem in a nutshell - as with Fascism, the pagans take concepts of race and gender that are completely the invention of modern society and set them up as timeless abstractions - it's just that they take the ideas of early modern society, and early Capitalism, projecting them back in a completely illusory way as if they had always existed, and contrasting them with contemporary society created by late Capitalism as if they were it's opposite rather than just an earlier phase of the same process.

The whole discourse of 'race', 'white identity', etc. (along with Social Darwinism, Eugenics and all the pseudo-science that goes along with it) is a completely modern invention, along with obsessions about the 'traditional' role of women.

Late capitalism tears up all traditional relationships. Marx expresses this beautifully:

"The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real condition of life and his relations with his kind."

Except that some people don't choose to face "the real condition of their life". They choose instead to retreat into fantasies about an older life in which everything was supposedly stable (sex, class and so-called 'race' relations) and so less threatening to them - hence everything from the 18th century druid revival to Bilbo Baggins, the heritage industry, Pagan tattoos, New Age mysticism and irrationalism and beyond. This nostalgia didn't exist on any significant scale until it was created by the development of capitalism. Paganism is every bit as modern as McNuggets.

(Not to mention the fact that there are no such things as separate 'races' of mankind - it's a completely reactionary chimera)

How much better it would be if people could unite across the artificial boundaries created by Capital (eg. the way it created the myth of 'race' to justify slavery and imperialism) in order to take control of the social world they have created.

"Except that some people don't choose to face "the real condition of their life". They choose instead to retreat into fantasies about an older life in which everything was supposedly stable (sex, class and so-called 'race' relations) and so less threatening to them - hence everything from the 18th century druid revival to Bilbo Baggins, the heritage industry, Pagan tattoos, New Age mysticism and irrationalism and beyond. This nostalgia didn't exist on any significant scale until it was created by the development of capitalism. Paganism is every bit as modern as McNuggets."

Paganism isn't a learned behavior its an instinct, nor did it ever completely go away.Like all instinct it presence radiates a constantly emanating force. I would state rather what happened is that capital finally won over Christianity to the point where that constant force wasn't being oppressed and it could freely express itself. So the notion that " This nostalgia didn't exist on any significant scale until it was created by the development of capitalism" is ridiculous in this light and shows a mind set of a person really alienated from the totality of themselves. The unconscious and its hardwired archetypes are just as much a part of what makes up you as your ego.

Take a look at Camile Paglia's sexual personae http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Personae

Or Jung's Wotan essay.

It's a shame that you guys want to reduce all of human culture, meaning and history to purely economic concerns. Weather its communism, fascism, or capitalism, or whatever-ism all these notions are just different degrees and means of shuffling around money. Fascism led to some slick uniforms, cool buildings and a lot of death, and Marxist ideals just led to lots of death, because you know, doing something well is oppressive. If people were really concerned about the influence of political extremism on marginal cultures because if unchecked it could end up with oppression, etc. in mass they should really be watching the far left, which has a much higher body count and history of producing mass human misery then the far right, if even only for lack of opportunity.

Also if race is a illusory concept, why does the left only freak out when people of the white race organize around the racial identity? Why are black nationalist groups and groups like A.P.O.C. given carte blanche? Also why do diseases exist that only effect certain races if these differences don't exist? Is it really that much of a stretch to say that different varieties of humanity that exist have evolved in different environments that shaped them to have different attributes reflective of adaptation to these respective locations?

I'm not making any value judgement of better or worse, just that varieties of humanity are just that- varied. Also that its peoples nature to seek out what is like them more then it is to seek out what it is not. Wasn't the whole point of cultural marxism to effectively psychologically malimprint the western world in order to make the people ready to receive a Marxist system? Given that it would take such drastic measures wouldn't you think it shows the working class could care less about what Marxists are peddling? But we have to be saved from ourselves by those who know better, right?

People should do whatever they can, if they so choose, "to take control of the social world they have created", but in whatever way they see fit per themselves. If you want a heavily bureaucratic big government socialist nanny state I'm not going to get in your way in so far that you don't get in mine. But you guys clearly can't stand the notion of other people doing what you don't agree with.

@Oneiric: "The unconscious and its hardwired archetypes are just as much a part of what makes up you as your ego."

True - but given that, like most modern 'idealists', you are at heart a crude materialist, you treat the unconscious as a fixed thing with 'hardwired' content ('pagan instincts') which, in a crude parody of Freud, you think the modern world suppresses. The 'instincts' you speak of are just as much social constructs as anything else but you treat them as foundational and build your politics on that basis.

"Also if race is a illusory concept, why does the left only freak out when people of the white race organize around the racial identity?"

Er... because the distictions between races are illusory and are a barrier to unity. The Fascists are quite clear about this - they treat race as fundamental and hate anything that puts class first. That's why they hate real socialists. The idea that race is fundamental is a lie put about by people trying to prevent working class unity. The idea that I have more in common with the leaders of the Tory party and the banks (because we are all white) than I have with a black worker is an idea designed to prevent class unity. I remember in the Miners Strike in the early 80s how some of the miners started out as racists, but soon changed their mind when they saw the solidarity they got from Black and Asian workers while their supposed 'race brothers' in the police and government tried to smash them. 'National Anarchists, Strasserites and the like pretend they support for working people, but they would rather they got shafted by their white bosses rather than unite with their black colleagues, friends and neighbours.

It's a shame that you guys want to reduce all of human culture, meaning and history to purely economic concerns"

No one here is reducing everything to 'economic concerns' - that idea is a crude caricature of Marxism that wouldn't stand up to ten minutes of actually reading Marx. What is being rejected is the crude materialism and occultism (they go together perfectly) that reduces humans to their genes (old school Nazis), racial 'spirit' (Evolian Nazis) or race archetypes (Pagan Nazis), and so on. It's a bit rich accusing us anti-fascists of economic reductionism when you are offering the crudest sort of reductionism of all (biological reductionism). To cap it all off, you then imagine that this crude reductionism is something to do with 'spirituality'.

"Why are black nationalist groups and groups like A.P.O.C. given carte blanche?"

I think this is more of an issue in the US than it is here in Europe. Black nationalists are few and far between here, even more obscure than the stuff that gets covered on this site, lol.

Having said that, I was criticising one of London's politicians here only yesterday for floating the idea of black-only schools, something I am vehemently opposed to.

It's also worth mentioning that London's working class has been breaking down supposed racial divisions since the 1950s through a protracted campaign of black and white people having children together.

Which is a further illustration of the socially constructed nature of all this "instinct" cobblers.

Incidentally, Oneiric, as all the so-called 'races' have a common ancestor, presumably the most profound and fundamental archetypes are held common by everyone. In other words, biological racism doesn't even make sense in it's own terms.

I stopped to read this in the middle of chores and errands, so I'm pausing here before I retort further later on tonight to say this as a matter of politeness: You guys are far more civil and well thought out then your American counter parts. In that regards I can appreciate and respect what your doing. I've really been enjoying this blog so far.

You know, despite all the ubermensch type of rhetoric that tends to go along with the area of culture I'm invested in, I have no problem with the notion that I'm just one random person doing my own thing on the margins of culture.

People getting all hyper-defensive on here in response to your critiques to me is silly. Like I said on the tronics board about this site, people should have fun with it. No one in society as a whole cares about what any of us have to say. Maybe you'll convince some kid with black suns all over his facebook page that this stuff is all crap, and maybe I'll get a lefty or two to realize that all this Marxist white guilt is just self-denial. So on with the master-debating;

"Incidentally, Oneiric, as all the so-called 'races' have a common ancestor, presumably the most profound and fundamental archetypes are held common by everyone."

I grew up in the one of the least white places in the country, Philadelphia, a place where groups like Black Hebrew Israelites are out in the public.

IMO, for all or for little that may or may not be, the one point of reference all varieties of humanity have in common is the sensual. We all need to feel love, have sex, eat, sleep, shit, piss, have a social structure we feel part of, and so on. In dealing with various non-whites over the years I have found that issues relating the sensual are often the main and/or only point whites and non-white people can relate to, depending on what group of non-whites are in question, and other reasonable mutual points of interest.

But when it comes to levels beyond the sensual I have found in my personal experience is when the differences between varieties of humanity become more apparent. Different varieties of humanity strike me as having different forms of consciousness that express themselves in divergent ways when held in comparison to other groups but also consistent universally with in themselves.

Even in regards to mutual interests between whites and non-whites, I've noticed consistent patterns exclusive to various races. For instance I'm into skateboarding and pay attention to it. I've noticed that black kids tend to gravitate to specific aspects of skateboarding at the expense of neglecting others. You'll see a lot of black kids doing technical and ledge tricks, but would be hard pressed to find one into vert ramps. Some old school races would point out the tendency in blacks towards show boating, etc. and hold that as a negative thing, but I say its not bad per say, just people aren't the same thing.

I'm also very much active with graffiti and street art and in philly its very obvious when graffiti is done by a black kid. Certain stylistic elements consistently emerge. Is this indicative of graffiti being filtered through purely cultural and environmental factors, or is it some unique inherent quality of blackness that the graffiti is being filtered through?

Is it nature or nurture? Can we admit that varieties of humanity have different natures that have been shaped by centuries of evolution in specific environments, that we have as much in common as we don't have in common, accept that about one another, but with out it leading to slavery and gas chambers?

If the xenophobic aspects of racialism are removed is it still a negative thing? I'm not bothered by the aspects of non-whites that seem alien to me, I just identify and gravitate towards what strikes me as inherently white. I was never into Oi, and a million screwdriver songs about white power pales in its effect to a single death in june song that actually makes you feel white.

Like I said in my interview on heathen harvest-

"If there were more parallel ethnocentric counter-cultural movements, such as say for example, if black kids started making weird Yoruba based music and built a community for themselves around it, I would completely get behind it. I wish all groups of people to divide and preserve their unique heritage. We may not get along, but Capitalism is the real enemy. Respect for peoples differences is leaving them alone! Free Tibet, Free Azatlan, Free Palestine and certainly Free Vinland!"

"Having said that, I was criticising one of London's politicians here only yesterday for floating the idea of black-only schools, something I am vehemently opposed to."

Why though? If blacks in London want that for themselves, is that so bad? Multiculturalism favors Capitalism, which would love to see us all dissolved into androgynous, mulatto clones with out any sense of history and there for destiny outside of the dictates of consumer control.

"It's also worth mentioning that London's working class has been breaking down supposed racial divisions since the 1950s through a protracted campaign of black and white people having children together.

Which is a further illustration of the socially constructed nature of all this "instinct" cobblers."

No that just reinforces my point. If you mix up peoples biological components through miscegenation you get don't get the same instinct. While this could given centuries give way to whole new forms and structures, its still a dissolution of previous forms.

Also I'm for sexual liberty. What two more people with the capacity to have orgasms do with one another is on them and none of my business. If people are into miscegenation I'm not going to stop them and I don't think that choice should be denied them. Having had sexual relationships in the past with non-white women I have come to my own conclusions as to why I wouldn't do so again. I would never deny anyone the choice the make up their own mind.

"The idea that race is fundamental is a lie put about by people trying to prevent working class unity. The idea that I have more in common with the leaders of the Tory party and the banks (because we are all white) than I have with a black worker is an idea designed to prevent class unity. I remember in the Miners Strike in the early 80s how some of the miners started out as racists, but soon changed their mind when they saw the solidarity they got from Black and Asian workers while their supposed 'race brothers' in the police and government tried to smash them."

I have had similar sympathies to working class non-whites over the years until I as an adult lived in predominately non-white areas. In my late teens/early 20s I lived in squats with other mainly white kids that were in completely black neighborhoods.

From there I realized that while I may have had certain class issues in common with non-whites, we still had huge differences that couldn't be easily explained away by mutual poverty. The answer to that issue, IMO, is the elimination of economic class structures with in whites themselves and for whites to reintegrate into an organic pagan totality of culture.

Get rid of the J/C influence on western culture and economic driven forms of governance.

I've noticed this topic is all the rage over on the far-right 'Stormfront Britain' internet forum/website (in a long running thread entitled 'Occult Nationalists?' on the 'Politics and Activism' section- Southgate, Boyd Rice, Moynihan and Pagan and Satanic fascist groups are mentioned).

There is abundant evidence that the man works for the security services. This includes (a) the fact that one of his front organizations was caught giving an address that, on investigation, turned out to be the address of a security company with links to MI5; (b) the fact that his associates have links with security services (notably Bill White in America -- look at his family background -- and Dugin in Russia whose connections with the FSB are well known); (c) the fact that he boasted of having the membership lists of several far-Right organizations (something that would not be easy to acquire without some training in intelligence work); (d) the fact that, although purporting to be unemployed and without any visible means of support, he nevertheless manages to tootle around Europe and publish mountains of drivel; (e) the fact that his behaviour is totally consistent with the aims of the security services: he was prominently involved in factional splits that largely destroyed the old National Front (it has since made something of a comeback) and also the ITP, and he is on record as advocating 'armed resistance against the British state' (an appeal that is clearly designed to attract the attention of anyone with terrorist inclinations). Of course, you can argue that such evidence (and there is much, much more) is all 'circumstantial' -- I suppose evidence of such things can't really be anything else -- however, if something looks like a pig, smells like a pig, and squeals like a pig then there's a fair probability that it will say 'oink'.

In order to clear up the nonsense posted above: (a) The 'front' organisation referred to was run by someone in Birmingham and was designed to provide employment for nationalists, mainly as doormen and security personnel for celebrities and whatnot. However, I was never personally involved in this business operation and the only connection they had with the intelligence services was a link to the MI5 homepage in the 'links' section of the company website. It also contained links to the police and various other things, although it was perfectly obvious to me that this was done in order to add a touch of respectability to the whole thing. If it was some kind of MI5 front then they would hardly have done it in such an open manner. They were touting for business, it's as simple as that, and a link to MI5 was designed to make them look like a serious security company; (b) Bill White is a complete nutcase and I am not in touch with him at all. He sent me some money for books a little while ago and I tore up the cheque and wrote to the people at The Barnes Review to enquire why such a loose cannon and Nutzi clown was running their publications department. Dugin, on the other hand, is a centralist and his ideas are very different to those of us in the National-Anarchist Movement (N-AM). I did have links with him at one time, but his vision of a Eurasian superstate is quite different to what we are proposing and many have criticised his links with Zionists; (c) I don't remember 'boasting' about having various membership lists, but I will openly admit that I inherited a massive database of names and addresses from the late-1970s National Front and we used that to send out ITP literature back in 1991. This was given to me by one-time Croydon NF activist Chris Marchant, who was acting on behalf of Derek Holland; (d) I am a single parent and have several part-time jobs, so I am not unemployed and have only ever visited the Continent to perform in a band. In fact I was thirty-seven before I had even stepped aboard a plane; (e) I was not involved in the 1986 factional split in the National Front, nor with the 1989 fiasco involving the split between the ITP and what later became Third Way in March 1990. I was actually a political prisoner at that time and only joined the ITP once I had been released; (f) We did advocate armed resistance against the State, that is perfectly correct, but these days it is far more prudent to avoid such a strategy. Finally, I have nothing whatsoever to hide and am perfectly happy to answer any further questions.